THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  ILLINOIS   . 
LIBRARY       • 
370 

ie6e 
no.25-37 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below.  A 
charge  is  made  on  all  overdue 
books. 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


-H 1  t ,    i  r,. 


uU 


(Iff*  is,  \%{ 


:"• 


' 


f  n  i  •  r 


JUN  -9  Who 


l£C  - 


rmib  UW 


M32 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2012  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign 


http://www.archive.org/details/educationaldiagn27stre 


UNIVERSITY    OF    ILLINOIS    BULLETIN 

Issued  Weekly 
Vol.  XXI  June  9,  1924  No.  41 

[Entered  as  second-class  matter  December  11,  1912,  at  the  post  office  at  Urbana,  Illinois,  under  the 
Act  of  August  24,  1912.  '  Acceptance  for  mailing  at  the  special  rate  of  postage  provided  for  in 
section   1103,  Act  of  October  3,    1917,  authorized  July  31,    1918.] 

BUREAU  OF  EDUCATIONAL  RESEARCH  CIRCULAR  NO.gO  ^W 


BUREAU  OF  EDUCATIONAL. RESEARCH 
COLLEGE  OF  EDUCATION 

EDUCATIONAL   DIAGNOSIS 

By 
Ruth  Streitz 

Associate,  Bureau  of  Educational  Research 


THE  UBRJtKT  ;: 
FEB     7  1925 

ERSfTV  OF  ILLINOIS 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
URBANA 


3  70 

EDUCATIONAL  DIAGNOSIS 

"Diagnosis"  used  with  several  meanings.  The  words  "diagno- 
sis" and  "diagnostic"  have  several  different  meanings  in  educational 
literature.  "Diagnostic"  has  been  used  in  the  descriptive  titles  of 
certain  tests  to  indicate  their  function.  Test-makers,  however,  have 
not  been  uniform  in  this  respect,  as  a  number  of  tests  called  "diag- 
nostic" appear  to  fulfill  this  function  less  completely  than  others  not 
so  labeled.  Similar  variations  in  the  use  of  the  word  "diagnosis" 
occur  in  accounts  of  the  interpretation  and  the  use  of  test  results. 

The  dictionary  states  that  "diagnosis"  means  scientific  determi- 
nation of  any  kind.  Thus,  a  teacher  has  diagnosed  his  pupils  when 
he  knows  them  scientifically.  Another  way  of  expressing  the  same 
idea  is  to  say  that  educational  diagnosis  means  accurate  and  detailed 
information  concerning  the  educational  status  of  pupils.  A  survey 
of  recent  literature  relative  to  educational  measurements  and  the 
remedial  instructions  which  should  follow  the  use  of  standardized 
tests  reveals  five  fairly  distinct  concepts  of  educational  diagnosis. 
I.  General  diagnosis. 

II.  Complete  diagnosis  which  is  sometimes  referred  to  as  de- 
tailed diagnosis. 

III.  Partial  diagnosis  which  is  the  same  as  semi-diagnosis. 

IV.  Analytical  diagnosis. 

V.  Differential  or  supplementary  diagnosis. 

I.  General  diagnosis.  "General  diagnosis"  means  just  what  the 
term  "general"  implies,  namely,  knowledge  in  a  general  way  of  the 
educational  status  of  pupils.  The  information  used  in  making  a  gen- 
eral diagnosis  should  be  accurate,  but  does  not  go  into  detail.  The 
general  standing  of  the  class  relative  to  the  norm  or  standard  is 
shown  and  the  pupils  of  high  and  of  low  achievement  are  "spotted." 
Thus  any  test  which  yields  a  simple  general  measure  in  the  opera- 
tions, or  even  in  the  entire  field  of  arithmetic  may  be  termed  diag- 
nostic in  this  sense.  However,  the  use  of  the  word  "diagnosis"  in  a 
general  sense  is  relatively  rare;  the  meaning  usually  associated  with 
the  term  is  described  under  the  head  of  "detailed  diagnosis." 

Typical  tests  for  general  diagnosis.  The  Courtis  Standard 
Supervisory  Tests  in  Arithmetic,  Monroe's  Standardized  Reasoning 

[3] 


Tests,  and  the  Woody-McCall  Mixed  Fundamentals  may  be  men- 
tioned as  typical  tests  for  general  diagnosis  in  the  field  of  arithmetic. 
Charters'  Diagnostic  Language  and  Grammar  Tests  fulfill  a  general 
diagnostic  function  when  the  number  of  exercises  done  correctly  is 
taken  as  a  pupil's  score.  All  reading  tests  with  the  exception  of  the 
Haggerty  Sigma  3  and  all  handwriting  scales  except  the  Gray  Score 
Card  may  be  considered  as  having  a  general  diagnostic  function. 

It  should  be  noted  that  none  of  these  tests  point  out  special 
weaknesses  but  merely  call  attention  to  the  position  of  the  class  or 
of  an  individual  pupil  in  regard  to  relative  standing  with  norms. 
Norms  are  thought  of  as  the  degree  of  ability  which  a  pupil  or  a 
group  of  pupils  should  possess.  If  the  class  makes  a  low  score  further 
study  must  be  made  to  ascertain  the  real  cause,  and  a  number  of 
factors  may  need  to  be  taken  into  consideration. 

II.  Complete  or  detailed  diagnosis.  Complete  diagnosis  is  based 
on  the  thesis  that  ability  in  such  a  field  as  arithmetic  is  made  up  of 
a  number  of  separate  or  specific  abilities.  It  is  the  opposite  of  gen- 
eral diagnosis;  instead  of  a  single  measure  representing  achievement 
over  the  field  of  a  school  subject  or  a  major  division  of  it,  there  are 
several  scores,  each  measuring  a  separate  or  specific  ability.  For  ex- 
ample, the  ability  required  for  short-column  addition  is  not  the  same 
as  that  for  long-column  addition.  A  still  different  ability  is  called  for 
in  an  example  requiring  carrying.  Detailed  diagnosis  refers  to 
learning  the  degree  of  each  of  these  specific  abilities  which 
a  pupil  has  acquired,  and  involves  the  separate  measurement  of  each. 
As  the  number  of  specific  abilities  appears  to  be  very  large,  a  com- 
plete diagnosis  in  any  school  subject  would  require  more  separate 
measurements  than  are  practicable.  For  this  reason  we  usually  either 
group  those  abilities  which  are  related,  or  confine  our  measurement 
to  those  which  seem  most  significant. 

Typical  tests  for  detailed  diagnosis.  An  excellent  example  of 
an  instrument  designed  for  complete  diagnosis  is  found  in  Monroe's 
Diagnostic  Tests  in  Arithmetic.  These  tests  deal  with  integers,  com- 
mon fractions  and  decimals  comprising  a  total  series  of  twenty-one 
tests,  each  having  from  twelve  to  twenty-four  examples.  Such  a 
series  of  diagnostic  tests  undoubtedly  yields  a  measurement  of  all 
the  significant  abilities  within  the  field. 

In  language  and  grammar  the  Brigg's  English  Form  Test  and 
Charters'  Diagnostic  Tests  in  Language  and  Grammar  for  Pronouns 

[4] 


and  Verbs1  may  be  mentioned.  The  Charters'  tests  measure  two  abil- 
ities: (1)  the  ability  to  use  correct  forms  of  pronouns  and  verbs  and 
(2)  the  ability  to  give  the  grammatical  rule  for  the  correct  form.  By  a 
special  arrangement  for  tabulation  the  record  of  each  pupil  is  given 
so  that  the  teacher  can  determine  those  errors  which  should  receive 
more  emphasis  and  those  pupils  who  are  lacking  in  ability.  As 
teaching  instruments,  tests  which  point  out  to  both  teacher  and 
pupil  the  strength  and  weaknesses  of  each  individual  in  each  phase 
of  the  subject  measured  are  far  more  valuable  than  those  which 
fail  to  reveal  such  situations. 

The  Freeman  Scale  for  Handwriting  and  the  Gray  Score  Card 
for  the  Measurement  of  Handwriting  illustrate  scales  having  com- 
plete diagnostic  function.  These  tests  measure  separate  abilities  such 
as  uniformity  of  slant,  uniformity  of  alignment,  letter  formation, 
quality  of  line  and  spacing.  Three  degrees  of  each  characteristic  are 
included  and  the  scores  show  the  relative  degree  of  perfection  at- 
tained in  each  of  the  separate  abilities. 

III.  Partial  diagnosis.  "Partial  diagnosis"  is  used  to  indicate 
tests  which  do  not  yield  such  detailed  information  concerning  pupils 
as  those  listed  under  complete  diagnosis,  but  which  are  more 
analytical  than  those  described  under  general  diagnosis.  There  are, 
of  course,  no  sharply  defined  lines  of  demarcation  between  the  three 
degrees  of  diagnosis,  complete,  partial  and  general.  These  terms, 
however,  have  been  used  to  describe  in  a  general  way  the  diagnostic 
qualities  of  standardized  tests. 

Typical  tests  for  partial  diagnosis.  Woody  Arithmetic  Scales 
and  the  Courtis  Standard  Research  Tests,  Series  B,  are  typical 
tests  for  partial  diagnosis.  They  are  general  in  the  field  of  each 
operation  but  are  diagnostic  to  the  extent  that  they  give  information 
for  each  of  the  fundamental  operations;  addition,  subtraction,  multi- 
plication and  division.  The  knowledge  that  a  particular  pupil  is 
weak  in  addition  does  not  necessarily  tell  the  teacher  in  what  par- 
ticular phase  he  may  be  weak.  Such  tests  simply  indicate  but  do  not 
diagnose  the  condition. 

IV.  Analytical  diagnosis.  Standardized  tests  can  show  only  the 
status  of  achievement.  They  do  not  give  information  concerning  the 
method  of  work  nor  the  cause  of  low  or  high  achievement.  A  low 
score  is   a   symptom;   the   interpretation   of   the   sympton   is   quite 

Charters'  tests  yield  a  complete  diagnosis  only  when  the  pupil's  performances 
on  the  exercises  of  the  tests  are  considered  separately. 

[5] 


another  matter.  In  prescribing  remedial  instruction,  the  fact  that 
the  pupil's  achievement  is  below  standard  does  not  give  sufficient 
information.  The  particular  reasons  for  his  failure  must  be  ascer- 
tained. For  this  purpose  one  may  employ  "analytical  diagnosis"  for 
which  three  procedures  are  recognized. 

1.  Observing  the  pupil  as  he  works. 

2.  Having  the  pupil  do  exercises  orally. 

3.  Studying  a  pupil's  test  paper2  or  other  written  work. 

1.  Observation  of  normal  work.  This  is  one  of  the  most  com- 
mon methods  and  involves  observing  the  behavior  of  the  pupil  being 
diagnosed  and  securing  a  hint  which,  when  later  interpreted,  gives 
some  clue  to  the  cause  of  the  trouble.  Many  teachers  do  this,  but 
unfortunately  few  have  a  systematic  plan  of  procedure.  Dignifying 
such  a  method  by  the  name  of  diagnosis  emphasizes  to  teachers  the 
importance  of  engaging  in  this  work  systematically  and  of  making  it 
a  more  prominent  part  of  their  teaching.  A  few  examples  in  the 
different  subjects  illustrate  the  significance  which  may  be  attached 
to  an  otherwise  ordinary  procedure. 

a.  Observing  a  pupil  engaged  in  silent  reading.  If  a  teacher 
watches  a  pupil  who  is  having  difficulty  with  reading  she  observes 
that  the  eyes  do  not  have  evenly  spaced  brief  fixation  per  line  but 
move  forward,  jump  back  again  and  act  in  a  generally  irregular 
fashion.  The  trained  teacher  recognizes  irregular  eye  movements  as 
symptoms  of  reading  difficulty.  It  may  be  that  the  pupil's  span  of 
recognition  is  too  narrow.  This  in  turn  may  be  because  the  reading 
material  is  too  difficult  and  contains  many  new  or  unfamiliar  words. 
Inability  to  recognize  certain  words  or  letters  results  from  insufficient 
experience  with  them.  Irregular  eye  movements  are  caused  because 
the  child  is  not  sure  of  all  he  has  seen  and  he  therefore  looks  back 
many  times  to  make  sure  of  the  words  which  are  necessary  for  com- 
prehending the  material  which  he  is  attempting  to  read. 

b.  Observing  a  pupil  as  he  works  examples  in  arithmetic.  A 
pupil  may  be  very  slow  at  figures.  As  he  attempts  to  add,  the  ob- 
serving teacher  notices  that  he  is  repeating  each  number  such  as  7 
and  6  are  13  and  5  are  18  and  4  are  22  instead  of  simply  calling  the 
partial  sums.  Or,  he  may  be  adding  each  number  by  whispering  to 
himself,  counting  on  his  fingers,  or  making  little  marks  on  his  paper 
or  at  the  blackboard. 


2Monroe,  Walter  S.    Measuring  the  Results  of  Teaching.    Boston:    Houghton 
Mifflin  Company,  1918,  p.  138-52. 

[6] 


A  trained  teacher  is  skillful  in  noting  certain  symptoms  which 
are  significant,  not  in  observing  everything  done  by  the  pupil.  This 
ability  to  discriminate  between  the  various  activities  of  the  pupil  and 
to  select  the  essential  things  which  have  direct  bearing  upon  his 
difficulty  is  an  absolute  necessity  for  the  teacher  who  wishes  to 
engage  successfully  in  analytical  diagnosis  of  this  type. 

2.  Oral  tracing  process.  When  observation  of  the  regular  school 
work  fails  to  disclose  any  illuminating  facts  regarding  the  incorrect 
mental  processes  of  the  pupils,  the  oral  tracing  method  may  be  re- 
sorted to.  The  pupil  is  asked  to  tell  the  teacher  just  how  he  has  done 
his  work.  In  this  way,  particular  errors  and  wasteful  methods  are 
frequently  brought  to  light.  Many  times  pupils  show  great  resource- 
fulness and  resort  to  methods  which  are  far  more  difficult  than  the 
correct  one.  For  example,  a  fifth  grade  pupil  found  the  difference 
between  some  numbers  by  first  dividing,  then  noting  the  remainder 
or  lack  of  it,  then  multiplying  and  finally  adding  to  or  taking  from 
the  result  as  necessary.  In  subtracting  9  from  44  he  proceeded  as 
follows:  9  goes  into  44  five  times  and  1  less;  4  times  9  are  36,  minus 
1  equals  35.  It  is  evident  that  this  boy  knew  certain  multiplication 
combinations  better  than  certain  subtraction  processes;  he  therefore 
used  multiplication  making  such  adjustments  as  were  demanded  by 
the  problem.3 

3.  Analysis  of  test  results.  This  method  of  diagnosis  requires 
careful  examination  of  the  test  papers  as  a  means  of  locating  the 
cause  of  pupil  difficulties.  Its  use  is  limited  because  the  nature  of  a 
pupil's  errors  cannot  be  determined  always  by  scrutinizing  his 
work.  For  example,  if  the  correct  sum  is  not  obtained  in  the  column 
addition  tests  of  the  Courtis  Series  B,  the  observer  is  unable  to  note 
the  trouble  as  there  is  no  record  of  the  procedure.  However,  in 
common  fractions  and  to  a  certain  extent  in  subtraction,  multiplica- 
tion and  division  of  integers  the  nature  of  the  errors  can  be 
determined. 

In  arithmetic  the  errors  noted  on  test  papers  may  be  tabulated 
so  that  the  teacher  can  gain  some  idea  of  the  kinds  of  errors  made 
and  also  of  the  frequency  of  occurrence.  If  a  fifth-grade  class  is  found 
to  have  56  percent  of  the  errors  in  borrowing  and  38  percent  in  the 
combinations,  it  is  evident  that  there  should  be  some  concentrated 
drill  on  these  troublesome  phases  of  the  work. 

8Uhl,  W.  L.    "The  use  of  standardized  materials  in  arithmetic  for  diagnosing 
pupils'  methods  of  work."   Elementary  School  Journal,  18:  215-18,  November,  1917. 

[7] 


An  analysis  of  addition  and  subtraction  of  common  fractions  is 
made  by  examining  the  test  papers  and  noting  how  the  work  is  per- 
formed; that  is,  the  number  of  pupils  who  add  the  numerators  for  a 
new  numerator  and  the  denominators  for  a  new  denominator;  the 
number  who  multiply  the  numerators  for  a  new  numerator  and  the 
denominators  for  a  new  denominator;  the  number  who  fail  to  reduce 
the  sum  to  the  lowest  terms  and  to  a  mixed  number,  etc.  Fre- 
quently pupils  employ  certain  methods  which  tend  to  waste  their 
time  and  to  introduce  errors  in  the  work.  For  example,  in  adding  %4 
and  %4  some  pupils  fail  to  notice  that  the  fractions  already  have  a 
common  denominator  and  reduce  them  to  the  common  denominator, 
196.  In  such  a  long  and  unnecessary  procedure  they  are  likely  to 
make  errors,  thus  obtaining  an  incorrect  answer. 

Spelling  is  another  subject  which  produces  an  objective  per- 
formance which  may  be  studied  at  length.  Misspelling  often  results 
from  slovenly  pronunciation  by  the  teachers  and  pupils,  from  certain 
phonic  irregularities  of  our  language,  from  a  lack  of  knowledge  of 
the  meaning  of  the  word,  from  the  length  of  the  word  or  the  posi- 
tion of  the  letters.  The  teacher,  by  examining  the  paper  more  closely 
than  merely  noting  the  number  of  misspelled  words,  will  be  able  to 
locate  points  of  needed  emphasis.  The  inversion  of  certain  letters, 
the  substitution  of  letters  having  similar  sounds,  and  the  substitu- 
tion of  letters  similar  in  appearance  are  a  few  of  the  errors  which 
may  be  mentioned.  A  tabulation  of  pupil  errors  is  a  convenient  way 
of  calling  attention  to  existing  conditions,  but  it  does  not  determine 
the  cause  of  the  difficulty. 

Handwriting  lends  itself  for  analytical  diagnosis.  One  has  some- 
thing definite  to  study  over  and  analyze  for  the  purpose  of  determin- 
ing the  particular  shortcomings  of  the  pupil. 

A  pupil's  performance  on  a  silent  reading  test  may  be  studied 
for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  errors4  which  he  is  accustomed 
to  make.  There  may  be  the  omission  of  whole  ideas,  confused  ideas, 
introduction  of  extraneous  ideas  and  the  predominance  of  certain 
portions  of  the  passage  not  specifically  referred  to  in  the  question. 
These  wrong  responses  may  in  turn  be  due  to  faulty  methods  of 
study  or  faulty  technique  on  the  part  of  students  in  utilizing  the 
information  they  possess. 


4Thorndike,  E.  L.  "Reading  as  reasoning:  A  study  of  mistakes  in  paragraph 
reading,"  Journal  of  Educational  Psychology,  8:330,  June,  1917.  "The  understand- 
ing of  sentences:  A  study  of  errors  in  reading,"  The  Elementary  School  Journal, 
18:107,  October,  1917. 

[8] 


V.  Differential  diagnosis.  Analytical  diagnosis  sets  forth  the 
nature  of  the  errors  but  does  not  reveal  the  cause.  Differential 
diagnosis  on  the  other  hand  seeks  to  ascertain  the  causes  for  the 
errors  in  terms  of  the  pupil's  mental  capacities. 

The  more  common  forms  of  diagnosis  have  referred  mainly  to 
a  comparison  of  individuals  and  classes  with  grade  norms.  If  the 
class  was  conspicuously  below  the  grade  norm  a  general  type  of 
interpretation  was  made,  such  as;  the  class  as  a  whole  should  have 
additional  instruction,  the  pupils  needed  a  different  type  of  training, 
or  perhaps  the  trait  measured  had  not  received  sufficient  emphasis. 
In  the  case  of  individual  pupils  a  similar  procedure  was  followed. 
Scores  below  the  grade  norm  were  interpreted  to  signify  a  weak- 
ness in  the  pupil's  training,  for  some  reason  he  had  "failed  to  re- 
spond in  a  satisfactory  manner.  This  type  of  diagnosis  is  valuable 
but  it  fails  to  take  into  account  the  capacity  of  the  pupil  to  learn. 

Differential  diagnosis,  however,  is  concerned  with  the  inherent 
mental  processes  of  pupils  and  recognizes  wide  differences  among 
children  of  the  same  chronological  age  and  grade.  A  mental-age 
norm  which  takes  into  account  the  general  intelligence  of  the  pupils 
seems,  therefore,  a  better  basis  for  comparison  than  a  grade  norm. 
The  use  of  such  a  norm  makes  it  possible  to  compare  the  achieve- 
ments of  each  pupil  with  the  norms  for  his  own  mental  age.  This 
comparison  may  be  made  conveniently  in  terms  of  the  achievement 
quotient  or  A.Q.  The  instructional  needs  of  the  pupil  cannot  be  de- 
termined until  we  know  his  capacity  to  learn. 

If  the  A.Q.  is  100  or  above,  and  there  is  no  reason  for  a  lack 
of  confidence  in  the  test,  we  conclude  that  the  pupil's  achievement 
is  just  up  to  or  above  the  standard  for  his  mental  age.  If  the  A.Q. 
is  less  than  100,  as  80,  it  means  that  the  pupil's  achievement  is  only 
80  percent  of  his  norm.  An  A.Q.  below  100  may  be  regarded  as 
evidence  that  continued  search  for  additional  information  must  be 
made.  For  this  purpose,  the  diagnostician  employs  both  psycho- 
logical and  informal  tests  and  also  tries  to  secure  a  complete  history 
of  the  individual. 

1.  Psychological  tests.  A  general  test  of  intelligence  is  used  to 
determine  the  pupil's  general  capacity  to  do  the  work  of  the  school. 
If  such  a  test  shows  that  the  pupil  possesses  average  intelligence  and 
if  he  still  fails  to  achieve  in  a  satisfactory  manner  the  examiner  must 
look  still  further  for  possible  causes. 

[9] 


2.  Informal  tests.  Standardized  tests  frequently  fail  to  provide 
sufficient  information  to  insure  an  accurate  diagnosis.  Informal  tests 
may  be  modifications  of  standardized  tests,  or  they  may  be  especially 
designed  by  the  examiner  in  order  to  help  determine  the  specific 
nature  of  a  certain  pupil's  difficulty. 

3.  Developmental  history.  Many  educational  defects  are  not 
due  to  immediate  causes  but  have  their  beginning  in  the  past,  far 
removed  from  the  grade  in  which  they  become  manifest.  The  dis- 
covery of  the  existence  of  these  defects  often  necessitates  obtaining 
both  a  personal  and  a  school  history  of  the  individual,  so  that 
nothing  in  the  child's  past  will  be  omitted  which  might  suggest  a 
diagnosis. 

First,  the  home  conditions  should  be  examined  to  see  how  these 
affect  the  child  and  his  school  work.  The  nationality  of  the  parents 
and  the  language  spoken  in  the  home  are  factors  not  to  be  dis- 
counted. The  attitude  of  the  parents  toward  the  child  is  also  im- 
portant as  many  ills  are  directly  traceable  to  too  much  repression, 
severity,  lack  of  sympathy,  understanding,  and  so  forth,  on  the  part 
of  the  parents.  Such  unhealthy  attitudes  are  frequently  reflected  in 
the  child,  making  him  unable  to  react  in  a  normal  manner,  and 
setting  him  apart  as  an  individual  whose  behavior  is  not  like  the 
majority  of  his  fellows. 

Secondly,  the  general  physical  condition  of  the  individual  should 
be  carefully  examined  and  special  attention  be  given  to  nutrition 
and  to  the  physical  defects  of  speech,  hearing  and  vision.  Mental 
characteristics  also,  temperament,  and  play  activities  often  point  the 
way  for  more  intensive  diagnosis.  Such  questions  as  the  following 
are  a  great  aid  to  the  diagnostician:  Is  the  child  timid,  aggressive, 
industrious,  lazy,  careful,  careless,  independent,  dependent,  coopera- 
tive, or  individualistic? 

In  order  to  leave  no  stone  unturned  which  r^y  give  enlighten- 
ment in  regard  to  the  educational  defects  of  pupils,  certain  peda- 
gogical data  should  be  collected  and  examined.  Information  such 
as:  number  of  years  the  pupil  has  been  in  school;  grade  or  grades 
skipped;  failure  of  promotion,  and  reason;  attendance  regular  or 
irregular,  and  the  causes  of  irregularity;  attitude  of  the  pupil  toward 
the  teacher  and  toward  the  school,  etc.  may  not  in  itself  seem  im- 
portant but  when  interpreted  in  connection  with  all  other  available 
data  may  furnish  significant  bits  of  evidence  which  the  diagnostician 
can  utilize. 

[10] 


The  field  of  differential  diagnosis,  however,  belongs  to  the 
specialist  and  not  to  the  class-room  teacher.  The  success  of  the 
diagnostician  depends  upon  her  knowledge  of  the  causes  of  defects 
in  the  various  abilities  which  the  school  attempts  to  develop.  She 
must  have  training  and  experience  in  order  to  interpret  behavior 
even  though  this  seems  too  subtle  for  analysis.  She  must  possess  a 
technique  which  will  enable  her  to  present  insignificant  clues  or  hints 
in  such  form  that  they  will  be  recognized  by  others.  And  she  must 
have  a  knowledge  of  proper  remedial  instruction  in  order  to  prescribe 
for  each  case  that  she  has  diagnosed. 

Technique  of  diagnosis  with  tests.  1.  Selection  of  instruments. 
In  selecting  tests  for  individual  diagnosis  the  phase  of  the  subject 
one  desires  to  measure  must  be  given  first  consideration.  For  formal 
diagnosis  in  reading,  Gray's  Oral  Reading  Test  could  be  admin- 
istered for  the  mechanics  of  reading;  Courtis  Silent  Reading  Test  for 
rate;  Burgess  Silent  Reading  Test  for  rate  of  accurate  interpreta- 
tion; and  Thorndike-McCall  Reading  Scale  for  the  Understanding  of 
Sentences  to  attack  more  difficult  problems.  The  Haggerty  Reading 
Examination  Sigma  I  is  designed  for  children  who  have  made  only 
a  beginning  in  silent  reading. 

In  handwriting,  Freeman's  Chart  for  Diagnosing  Faults  in 
Handwriting  is  good  for  individual  diagnosis  but  not  for  the  survey 
of  a  whole  school  system.  It  is  also  an  excellent  device  for  class- 
room use  and  enables  the  children  to  make  their  own  diagnosis  by 
comparing  their  work  with  the  chart. 

An  analysis  of  arithmetical  abilities  is  made  possible  by  a 
number  of  tests.  The  Monroe  Diagnostic  Tests  in  Arithmetic  fur- 
nish the  most  important  types  of  arithmetical  material  arranged  for 
the  various  grades,  and  are  of  great  value  to  those  teachers  who 
wish  to  determine  specific  difficulties  encountered  by  their  pupils. 
The  Woody  Arithmetic  Scales  enable  the  teacher  to  sample  a  pupil's 
ability  in  the  four  fundamental  operations.  The  Cleveland  Survey 
Tests  in  Arithmetic  give  a  number  of  views  of  a  pupil's  achievement 
in  the  four  fundamentals;  they  are  diagnostic  but  need  further  in- 
vestigation with  informal  tests  in  order  to  ascertain  the  errors  made 
by  the  individual.  In  summarizing  these  three  arithmetic  tests,  we 
may  say  that  the  Cleveland  Survey  Tests  in  Arithmetic  show  how 
rapidly  pupils  can  work  the  four  fundamentals,  the  Woody  Arith- 


[11] 


metic  Scales  emphasize  the  difficulty  of  the  examples  which  a  pupil  is 
able  to  do,  and  the  Monroe  Diagnostic  Tests  in  Arithmetic  point  out 
or  diagnose  the  specific  weaknesses  of  pupils. 

In  the  content  subjects,  there  are  several  tests  which  may  be 
used  but  in  general  they  are  not  very  satisfactory.  More  complete 
analysis  of  these  subjects  must  be  made  before  tests  comparable 
with  those  in  arithmetic,  spelling,  handwriting  or  silent  reading  can 
be  constructed.  Furthermore,  it  should  be  noted  that  most  of  the 
available  tests  are  general  rather  than  diagnostic  in  character. 

2.  Administration.  In  administering  tests  a  high  degree  of  uni- 
formity must  be  maintained,  or  valid  comparisons  cannot  be  made 
between  individuals  or  groups.  The  authors  of  most  of  our  standard- 
ized educational  tests  recognize  this  necessity  and  give  definite 
directions  which  must  be  followed  by  the  examiner.  If  the  tests  are 
for  the  purpose  of  appraisal  of  a  good  school  system  a  trained  person 
should  conduct  or  at  least  supervise  the  examination,  if  for  the 
purpose  of  diagnosis  of  individual  pupils  the  class-room  teachers  may 
initiate  and  carry  out  the  testing  program. 

3.  Tabulating  of  scores  for  diagnosis,  a.  Tests  yielding  a  sin- 
gle score.  When  a  test  yields  only  one  score  for  a  pupil  the  results 
for  the  class  may  be  assembled  in  a  frequency  distribution  from 
which  the  class  median  or  average  may  be  calculated.  Most 
standardized  tests  are  accompanied  by  a  class  record  sheet  which 
facilitates  this  work.  Such  a  tabulation  of  scores,  however,  is  not 
very  helpful  in  making  a  diagnosis  of  the  class.  For  this  purpose 
one  may  rank  the  pupils  according  to  their  scores  as  shown  below. 
These  scores  were  made  by  a  third-grade  class  on  the  Burgess 
Picture  Supplement  Scale  for  Measuring  Silent  Reading  Ability. 


PudU 


Score        Pupil 


Score        Pupil 


Score 


Helen 9 

Thomas 8 

John 8 

Rose 6 

Elizabeth 6 

Fred 6 

Robert 5 


Marie 5 

Alice 5 

Tom 5 

Lillian 5 

Mary 4 

Evelyn 4 

William 4 


Annie 3 

Jack 3 

Charles 2 

Leslie 2 

Edward 1 

Anna 1 


[12] 


A  different  and  in  some  cases  a  more  effective  plan  of  arranging 
the  scores  made  by  each  pupil  is  shown  below. 


2  J; 

<  W 


C/3 
U 


a  B 
Kb.  2 

re   ■-,•-* 


otto 

_.   aj  •-   o   re 


111 


c  a 

o  r* 


5 


In  order  to  emphasize  the  graphical  feature  in  presenting  single 
scores,  some  users  of  tests  have  represented  each  pupil  by  a  block  on 
which  his  name  or  initial  is  written.  The  following  diagram  is  quoted 
from  an  article  by  Zirbes.5 


N 


K    O 


M 


F     I     G    A    B 


10 


15 


[Rate  of  read- 
«nJ  ing  expressed 
*M  ]  in    lir 

b 


lines     per 


Such  an  arrangement  of  scores  enables  the  pupil  to  know  his 
standing  in  comparison  with  other  members  of  the  class.  If  the  test 
is  repeated  at  regular  intervals,  he  may  observe  his  progress  or  lack 
of  it,  and  be  encouraged  to  compete  with  his  own  record. 

b.  Tests  yielding  two  scores.  When  a  test  yields  two  scores 
each  may  be  handled  separately  according  to  the  plans  just 
described.  Usually,  however,  it  will  be  helpful  to  combine  the  two 
scores  in  a  single  arrangement.  The  following  diagram6  represents 
the  scores  made  by  the  pupils  of  a  fifth-grade  class  on  the  addition 
test  of  the  Courtis  Standard  Research  Tests  in  Arithmetic.  The  plan 
of  the  diagram  is  very  similar  to  the  class  record  sheet  which 
accompanies  these  tests.  Each  square  represents  the  number  of 
examples   attempted   and  the   percent  of   accuracy.    Thus,  when  a 


5Zirbes,  Laura.  "Diagnostic  measurement  as  a  basis  for  procedure."  Elementary- 
School  Journal,  18:512,  March  1918. 

"Monroe,  Walter  S.  Measuring  the  Results  of  Teaching.  Boston:  Houghton 
Mifflin  Company,  1918,  p.  120. 

[13] 


pupil's  name  is  written  in  a  square  a  graphical  representation  of  two 
scores  is  shown.  For  example,  Joe  attempted  eight  examples  and  his 
percent  of  accuracy  was  between  80  and  89  percent. 

Double  lines,  as  in  the  accompanying  diagram,  may  be  drawn 
to  represent  the  standards  or  norms.  These  four  divisions  simplify 
the  interpretation  of  the  diagram.  The  one  in  the  upper  right-hand 
position  contains  the  names  of  all  pupils  who  are  above  the  standard 
in  both  scores;  that  in  the  lower  left-hand  corner,  those  pupils  who 
are  below  standard  in  both  scores;  and  the  other  two  divisions, 
those  pupils  who  are  above  standard  in  one  score  but  below  in  the 
other.  The  diagram  thus  shows  in  a  compact  but  expressive  form  the 
status  of  each  member  of  the  class  as  well  as  of  the  class  as  a 
whole.  The  general  character  of  the  instruction  which  the  different 
pupils  need  is  indicated.  Those  whose  names  appear  in  the  upper 
left-hand  division  of  the  diagram  should  be  given  training  to  in- 
crease their  rate  of  work.  They  are  at  present  above  standard  in 
accuracy,  and  care  must  be  exercised  to  prevent  their  work  becom- 
ing less  accurate  as  they  increase  their  rate. 

Tabulation  showing  record  of  each  pupil  on  each  exercise  of  a 
test.  In  the  case  of  many  tests  it  is  helpful  to  know  the  record  of  each 


Percent 

Number  of  Examples  Attempted 

Number 

of 
Accuracy 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

of 
Pupils 

100 

90 

John 

1 

80 

Thomas 
Mary 

Joe 

3 

70 

Marie 

Ann 

Jack  A. 

Fred 

4 

60 

Ruth 

Bob 

Morris 
Jack  B. 

Lillian 

5 

50 

Ben 

Eliz. 

2 

0-2  49 

Charles 

Ray 

May 

Cora 

Virginia 

Mary 

JackC 

Tom 

Roy 

Dick 
Edward 
Mildred 
Evelyn 

Eva 
Betty 

Horace 

16 

Number 

of 

Pupils 

1 

1 

3 

5 

7 

3 

4 

4 

2 

1 

31 

[14] 


pupil  on  each  separate  exercise.  A  different  form  of  tabulation  for 
showing  this  information  is  illustrated  below.  A  zero  is  placed  in  the 
appropriate  column  opposite  the  pupil's  name  to  indicate  that  he 
has  failed  to  do  that  exercise  correctly.  In  the  accompanying  dia- 
gram, Pearl  failed  on  exercises  1,  2,  5,  6,  and  7.  Such  a  plan  of  tab- 
ulation also  shows  the  particular  exercises  which  the  class  found 
difficult  and  which  should  receive  general  emphasis  in  the  teaching. 


Pupil 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Pearl 

0 
0 

0 

0 
0 

0 
0 

0 

0 

0 
0 
0 
0 

0 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 

0 
0 
0 

0 

Edwin. .  . . 

Cecil 

Elizabeth 

Vera 

0 

Helen 

William 

Ben 

Gertrude 

Roy 

0 
0 

Helen  W 

Glenn 

0 
0 

Herbert 

0 

Diagnosis  not  a  mechanical  procedure.  Pupils  present  as  great 
variations  in  their  difficulties  and  needs  for  instruction  as  in  their 
achievements.  A  mere  mechanical  arrangement  for  tabulating  test 
scores  or  for  representing  them  graphically  will  not  lead  to  effective 
diagnosis.  The  plans  described  in  the  preceding  pages  should  be 
useful,  but  the  teacher  should  bear  in  mind  that  all  pupils  are  not 
alike  and  that  frequently  information  other  than  that  recorded  from 
standardized  tests  or  even  from  analytical  diagnosis  must  be  sought 
in  order  to  determine  a  pupil's  instructional  needs.  A  teacher,  who 
wishes  to  become  an  efficient  diagnostician,  must  do  more  than  apply 
some  mechanical  procedure  to  the  scores  yielded  by  a  standardized 
test. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1.   Periodicals 

Ashbaugh,  E.  J.  "The  measurement  of  language:  what  is  measured  and  its  signifi- 
cance," Journal  of  Educational  Research,  4:32-39,  June,  1921. 

Capps,  A.  G.  "Function  of  tests  and  scales  found  in  recent  educational  periodicals," 
Journal  of  Educational  Research,  6:204-07,  October,  1922. 

Courtis,  S.  A.  "Courtis  tests  in  arithmetic:  value  to  superintendents  and  teachers." 
Fifteenth  Yearbook  of  the  National  Society  for  the  Study  of  Education,  Part  1. 
Bloomington,  Illinois:    Public  School  Publishing  Company,  1916,  p.  91-106. 

[IS] 


Freeman,    F.   N.     "An    analytical    scale   for   measuring   handwriting,"    Elementary 

School  Journal,  15:432-41,  April,  1915. 
Judd,  C.  H.,  Gates,  A.  L.,  and  Zirbes,  Laura.    "Special  review  of  Mrs.  Burgess' 

Silent    Reading   Monograph,"   Journal   of    Educational    Psychology,    12:348-54, 

September,  1921. 
Kallom,  Arthur  W.    "Analysis  of  and  testing  of  common  fractions,"  Journal  of 

Educational  Research,  1:177-92,  March,  1920. 
Kallom,  Arthur  \Y.    "The  importance  of  diagnosis  in  educational  measurement," 

Journal  of  Educational  Psychology,  10:1-12,  January,  1919. 
Minnick,  J.  H.    "Certain  abilities  fundamental  to  the  study  of  arithmetic,"  Journal 
,       -of  Educational  Psychology,  9:83-90,  February,  1918. 
MSnroe,  Walter  S.    "An  experimental  and  analytical  study  of  Woody's  Arithmetic 

Se2fcs,  Series  B,"  School  and  Society,  6:412-20,  October,  1917. 
Monroe,  Walter  S.    "A  series  of  diagnostic  tests  in  arithmetic,"  Elementary  School 

Journal,  19:585-607,  April,  1919. 
Rogers,  Bertha,  and  Baker,  Teresa.    "Diagnosis  and  remedial  activity  in  super- 
vision," Journal  of  Educational  Research,  5:21-26,  January,  1922. 
Theisen,  W.  W.,  and  Flemming,  Cecile  W.    "The  diagnostic  value  of  the  Woody 

Arithmetic   Scales:    a   reply.    Part    I-II,"   Journal   of   Educational   Psychology, 

9:475-88,  567-80;  November,  December,  1918. 
Woody,  C.  W.    "Measuring  some  achievements  in  arithmetic,"  School  and  Society, 

4:229-303,  August,  1916. 
Zirbes,  Laura.    "Diagnostic  measurement   as   a   basis  for   procedure,"   Elementary 

School  Journal,  18:505-22,  March,  1918. 

2.   Books 

Bronner,  Augusta.  The  Psychology  of  Special  Abilities  and  Disabilities.  Boston: 
Little,  Brown  and  Company,  1917,  p.  23-24. 

Burgess,  May  Ayres.  Measurement  of  Silent  Reading.  New  York:  Russell  Sage 
Foundation,  1920.    163  p. 

Freeman,  F.  N.  The  Teaching  of  Handwriting.  New  York:  Houghton  Mifflin 
Company,  1914.   155  p. 

Gray,  W.  S.  Remedial  Cases  in  Reading:  Their  Diagnosis  and  Treatment.  Sup- 
plementary Educational  Monograph  No.  22.  Chicago:  University  of  Chicago 
Press,  1922.    208  p. 

Gregory,  C.  A.  Fundamentals  of  Educational  Measurements.  New  York:  D.  Ap- 
pleton  and  Company,  1922.    381  p. 

Hines,  Harlan  C.  A  Guide  to  Educational  Measurement.  Boston:  Houghton 
Mifflin  Company,  1923.   270  p. 

Hollingsworth,  Leta  S.,  and  Winifred,  C.  Amelia.  "The  psychology  of  special 
disability  in  spelling."  Teachers  College  Contributions  to  Education,  No.  88, 
New  York:    Teachers  College,  Columbia  University,  1918.    105  p. 

Judd,  C.  H.  Measuring  the  Work  of  the  Public  Schools.  Cleveland  Survey,  Phila- 
delphia:   Wm.  F.  Fell  and  Company,  1916,  p.  98. 

McCall,  Wm.  A.  How  to  Measure  in  Education.  New  York:  Macmillan  Company, 
1922.  416  p. 

Monroe,  Walter  S.  An  Introduction  to  the  Theory  of  Educational  Measurements. 
Boston:    Houghton  Mifflin  Company,  1923.    364  p. 

Monroe,  Walter  S.  Measuring  the  Results  of  Teaching.  Boston:  Houghton  Mifflin 
Company,  1918.   297  p. 

Pressey,  S.  L.  and  Pressey,  L.  C.  Introduction  to  the  Use  of  Standardized  Tests. 
Yonkers,  New  York:    World  Book  Company,  1922.    263  p. 

[16] 


